Purpose The evidence base for peer support work in mental health is established, yet implementation remains a challenge. The aim of this systematic review was to identify influences which facilitate or are barriers to implementation of mental health peer support work. Methods Data sources comprised online databases (n = 11), journal table of contents (n = 2), conference proceedings (n = 18), peer support websites (n = 2), expert consultation (n = 38) and forward and backward citation tracking. Publications were included if they reported on implementation facilitators or barriers for formal face-to-face peer support work with adults with a mental health problem, and were available in English, French, German, Hebrew, Luganda, Spanish or Swahili. Data were analysed using narrative synthesis. A six-site international survey [Germany (2 sites), India, Israel, Tanzania, Uganda] using a measure based on the strongest influences was conducted. The review protocol was pre-registered (Prospero: CRD42018094838). Results The search strategy identified 5813 publications, of which 53 were included. Fourteen implementation influences were identified, notably organisational culture (reported by 53% of papers), training (42%) and role definition (40%). Ratings on a measure using these influences demonstrated preliminary evidence for the convergent and discriminant validity of the identified influences. Conclusion The identified influences provide a guide to implementation of peer support. For services developing a peer support service, organisational culture including role support (training, role clarity, resourcing and access to a peer network) and staff attitudes need to be considered. The identified influences provide a theory base to prepare research sites for implementing peer support worker interventions.

Background: Many studies indicate that men are more reluctant to seek help for mental health problems than women. Traditional ideas of masculinity are often seen as a cause of this phenomenon. However, little is known about the diversity of experiences during the processes of help-seeking and service use among men with depression who have already utilized mental health services. This study aims to explore men's experiences and attitudes toward depression, help-seeking, and service use in order to develop gender-sensitive services.Methods: Narrative-biographical interviews were conducted with men treated for depression (n = 12). Interview topics included individual experience with depression, help-seeking behavior, and mental health service use. Transcripts were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.Results: Before seeking treatment, men's help-seeking behavior was negatively affected by internalized masculine norms. However, findings indicate a change of attitudes toward depression after mental health service use. Men with depression emphasized a salutogenic perspective toward mental health problems and critically reflected on masculine norms. The positive function of men-only groups were described as key for successful service use.Conclusions: Men with depression reported experiences toward help-seeking and service use on four different levels: (i) attitudes toward depression, (ii) perception of societal views on depression, (iii) experiences within the family context and (iv) experiences with mental health services. Interventions to reduce the stigma of being “unmanly” and to improve men's capacity to cope with being unable to work should be developed. Peer-led men-only groups may increase participants' self-esteem and assist in disclosing weaknesses. In the context of GPs' mediating role, training for health professionals concerning the impact of masculine norms on mental health is recommended.

Background: Peer support is an established intervention involving a person recovering from mental illness supporting others with mental illness. Peer support is an under-used resource in global mental health. Building upon comprehensive formative research, this study will rigorously evaluate the impact of peer support at multiple levels, including service user outcomes (psychosocial and clinical), peer support worker outcomes (work role and empowerment), service outcomes (cost-effectiveness and return on investment), and implementation outcomes (adoption, sustainability and organisational change). Methods: UPSIDES-RCT is a pragmatic, parallel-group, multicentre, randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of using peer support in developing empowering mental health services (UPSIDES) at four measurement points over 1 year (baseline, 4-, 8-and 12-month follow-up), with embedded process evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis. Research will take place in a range of high-, middle-and low-income countries (Germany, UK, Israel, India, Uganda and Tanzania). The primary outcome is social inclusion of service users with severe mental illness (N = 558; N = 93 per site) at 8-month follow-up, measured with the Social Inclusion Scale. Secondary outcomes include empowerment (using the Empowerment Scale), hope (using the HOPE scale), recovery (using Stages of Recovery) and health and social functioning (using the Health of the Nations Outcome Scales). Mixed-methods process evaluation will investigate mediators and moderators of effect and the implementation experiences of four UPSIDES stakeholder groups (service users, peer support workers, mental health workers and policy makers). A cost-effectiveness analysis examining cost-utility and health budget impact will estimate the value for money of UPSIDES peer support.

BackgroundThe Network for Mental Health (NWpG-IC) is an integrated mental health care program implemented in 2009 by cooperation between health insurance companies and community mental health providers in Germany. Meanwhile about 10,000 patients have been enrolled. This is the first study evaluating the effectiveness of the program in comparison to standard mental health care in Germany.MethodsIn a parallel-group controlled trial over 18 months conducted in five regions across Germany, a total of 260 patients enrolled in NWpG-IC and 251 patients in standard mental health care (TAU) were recruited between August 2013 and November 2014. The NWpG-IC patients had access to special services such as community-based multi-professional teams, case management, crisis intervention and family-oriented psychoeducation in addition to standard mental health care. The primary outcome empowerment (EPAS) and the secondary outcomes quality of life (WHO-QoL-BREF), satisfaction with psychiatric treatment (CSQ-8), psychosocial and clinical impairment (HoNOS) and information about mental health service needs (CAN) were measured four times at 6-month intervals. Linear mixed-effect regression models were used to estimate the main effects and interaction effects of treatment, time and primary diagnosis. Due to the non-randomised group assignment, propensity score adjustment was used to control the selection bias.ResultsNWpG-IC and TAU groups did not differ with respect to most primary and secondary outcomes in our participating patients who showed a broad spectrum of psychiatric diagnoses and illness severities. However, a significant improvement in terms of patients’ satisfaction with psychiatric care and their perception of treatment participation in favour of the NWpG-IC group was found.ConclusionsProviding integrated mental health care for unspecific mentally ill target groups increases treatment participation and service satisfaction but seems not suitable to enhance the overall outcomes of mental health care in Germany. The implementation of strategies for ameliorating the needs orientation of the NWpG-IC should be considered.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trial Register DRKS00005111, registered 26 July 2013.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12888-017-1441-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.